Observations on Rules for Nomenclature. 155 



ticism, as well as by the practice of antiquity? But let me 

 not be understood as hostile to such " laws of nomenclature " 

 as are founded upon just and fixed principles. These, how- 

 ever, are few and simple : I conceive that they may be all re- 

 duced to euphony and propriety of application, principles 

 which are equally sanctioned by sound logic and the nature 

 and practice of all languages, but which I find no where 

 clearly developed in any of the codes of nomenclature, lately 

 published. 



But the spirit of innovation is not confined to the mere no- 

 menclature of science; our zoological radicals have even con- 

 descended to undertake the reformation of the vulgar tongue; 

 mere English terms are not sufficiently " poluphlosboiopha- 

 nous "* to suit the refined taste of these fastidious legislators, 

 and the commonest words in the language must be assayed 

 anew, and recoined at their patent mint. Two or three inge- 

 nious gentlemen have undertaken the herculean task of cor- 

 recting the vernacular names of our common British birds; and 

 if, out of the 36,000,000 of human beings who speak our 

 language, they can only succeed in persuading the other 

 35,999,997 or 8, to adopt the proposed reform, I shall be 

 very willing to follow the example, and congratulate them on 

 their success. Others, again, write Mammalians, Reptilians, 

 and Molluscans, for the more simple terms mammals, reptiles, 

 and mollusks ; and I am only surprised that they have not 

 likewise discarded such mean and vulgar words as birds and 

 fish, in favour of the more "poluphlosboiophanous" terms, a- 

 vians and piscians. Nay, the very names employed by the 

 ancient Greeks in their own language, are not sufficiently "po- 

 luphlosboiophanous" to suit the modern taste ; the word Me- 

 taphysics has given place to Psychology, and one gentleman 

 even calls mind the Psychian faculty I 



Such are a few of the results of intermeddling legislation; — 

 confusion of terms, petty larceny, multiplication of unneces- 

 sary synonymes, murder of the Queen's English, and "polu- 

 phlosboiophony " ! 



But before concluding, let me briefly advert to a subject 

 which I confess I have much at heart, because the strength 

 and euphony of our powerful and harmonious language are 

 both interested in the question. I allude to the kind of rival- 

 ry at present subsisting between the words mammal and 



* As the poverty of our language does not afford a term sufficiently mag- 

 niloquent to express the great quality aimed at by the reformers of nomen- 

 clature, I beg leave to introduce that here proposed, which, being formed 

 in strict accordance with " the laws of nomenclature," will, I hope, satisfy 

 the most fastidious of our legislators. 



